Teacher and Principal Evaluation Pilot - Washington

Teacher and Principal Evaluation Pilot

Report to the Legislature

Randy I. Dorn

State Superintendent of Public Instruction

July 2011

OSPI provides equal access to all programs and services without discrimination based on sex, race, creed, religion, color, national origin, age, honorably discharged veteran or military status, sexual orientation including gender expression or identity, the presence of any sensory, mental, or physical disability, or the use of a trained dog guide or service animal by a person with a disability. Questions and complaints of alleged discrimination should be directed to the Equity and Civil Rights Director at (360) 725-6162 or P.O. Box 47200 Olympia, WA 98504-7200.

TEACHER AND PRINCIPAL EVALUATION PILOT

Prepared by Michaela W. Miller, Program Director

K-12 Education/Teacher and Principal Evaluation

Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction Michaela W. Miller, Program Director

Randy I. Dorn Superintendent of Public Instruction

Alan Burke, Ed.D. Deputy Superintendent, K-12 Education

July 2011

Table of Contents

Executive Summary..................................................................... ii

I. Introduction.............................................................................................. 1 A. Legislative Background 1. Summary of E2SSB 6696 2. Timeline/System Development 3. Foundation of the Evaluation Systems a. Revised Teacher and Principal Criteria b. Four-Level System i. Teachers ii. Principals c. Using Student Growth Data in Evaluations 4. TPEP Steering Committee 5. TPEP Pilot Districts a. TPEP Pilot Site Overview

II. Process ..................................................................................................... 7 A. Evaluation System Implementation Status 1. Evaluation System Overview 2. Major Components Common to all Pilots a. Common Statewide Revised Criteria Definitions b. Common Statewide Tier Labels c. Common Statewide Tier Summative Statements d. Common Statewide Satisfactory/Not Satisfactory Dilineation

3. District Determined Components a. Instructional and Leadership Framework b. Multiple Measures of Teacher and Principal Performance

III. Findings .................................................................................................. 18 A. Research and Reports B. Blueprint for Changing and Implementing the Washington State Evaluation System

IV. Next Steps..................................................................................18 A. TPEP Pilot Sites B. State-level Taskforce Committees

V. Recommendation ................................................................................... 22 A. Superintendent Dorn's Recommendation 1. One or Multiple Models 2. Evaluation System Components 3. State-Approval Process 4. Challenges to a State Evaluation Approval Process

2

VI. Conclusion .............................................................................................. 24

VII. Bibliography ........................................................................................... 24

VIII.

Appendices ............................................................................................. 24

A. Teacher Evaluation Model Visual Diagram B. Principal Evaluation Model Visual Diagram C. Washington Teacher/Principal Evaluation Pilot Cross-Case Analysis

o D. Washington Teacher/Principal Evaluation Pilot Case Studies and Evaluation Models

1. Anacortes

2. Central Valley

3. Kennewick

4. NEWESD 101 Consortium

5. North Mason

6. North Thurston

7. Othello

8. Snohomish

9. Wenatchee

E. Washington Teacher/Principal Evaluation Statewide Data Analysis Report o

F. OSPI Practitioner Panel Review o Practitioner Workgroups Proposal April 2011 o TPEP Model Review Templates o TPEP Practitioner Panel Participants o TPEP Practitioner Panels System & State Feedback

G. OSPI School Employee Evaluation Survey Summary and Data 1. OSPI School Employee Evaluation Survey PDF Summary

 PDF_SY2009-10.pdf

2. OSPI School Employee Evaluation Survey Data File Data_SY2009-10.xlsx

H. Washington Teacher/Principal Evaluation Pilot Site Interview Compilation (Video) o

List of Tables

Table 1

Table 2 Table 3 Table 4 Table 5 Table 6 Table 7 Table 8 Table 9 Table 10 Table 11 Table 12 Table 13 Table 14 Table 15

Comparison of Existing Evaluation Requirements and Revised E2SSB 6696 Components TPEP Pilot District and Statewide Implementation Timeline Revised Teacher and Principal Criteria TPEP Steering Committee Members and Organizations Participating TPEP Pilot Districts TPEP Pilot Site Overview Evaluation System Overview Glossary Common Statewide Revised Teacher Criteria Definitions Common Statewide Revised Principal Criteria Definitions Draft Common Statewide Tier Labels Draft Common Statewide Tier Summative Statements - Teacher Teacher Instructional Frameworks by District Measures Under Consideration by District - Teacher Measures Under Consideration by District - Principal State-level Taskforce Committees

Executive Summary

Background

The Teacher & Principal Evaluation Project (TPEP), which was created in Engrossed Second Substitute Senate Bill 6696 (E2SSB 6696) in the 2010 Legislative Session, offers Washington State the opportunity to identify the measures of effective teaching and leading. The new Washington State evaluation system must both hold educators accountable and be leverage for authentic professional growth. This emerging system, built on the foundation of the new teacher and principal criteria and developed by Washington State educators, provides a direction that will empower teachers, principals and district leaders to meet the needs of students in Washington State. The new evaluation system sets high expectations for what teachers and principals should know and be able to do, values diversity, and fosters a high commitment to teaching and leading as professional practice.

Setting the Context

According to the Joyce Foundation, by the end of 2010 twelve states had passed new state teacher/principal evaluation laws. Washington State is included in this bold group of states that embarked on a journey of creating a new system for measuring teacher and leadership performance. The research over the past 10 years establishing the critical importance of quality teachers and leaders (Barber & Mourshed, 2007; Leithwood, Louis, Anderson, & Wahlstrom, 2004; Rivkin, Hanushek, & Kane, 2005; Rockoff, 2004) prompted policymakers to look to evaluation as a lynchpin to education reform. It is important to note that the other areas impacting teacher and leadership quality should not be overlooked and are inextricably linked to evaluation. "Such areas include these components of the educator career continuum: traditional certification, alternative certification, mentoring and induction, professional development, evaluation, compensation, equitable distribution, and tenure." (Behrstock, Meyer, Wraight, & Bhatt, 2009).

Educators in Washington State overwhelming agree, the current evaluation system requires a much needed overhaul. During the 2010-11 school year, OSPI conducted a survey and ten forums with nearly 7,000 educators outside of the TPEP pilot sites and found that 80 percent indicated the primary purpose of the current evaluation system was compliance. Practitioners in and out of the TPEP pilot sites "want tools for improvement and growth." (Fetters, J., & Behrstock-Sherratt, E., 2011). All indications are that Washington State took the right step to enact E2SSB 6696 and the strong belief that the evaluation changes will produce positive results for our students.

ii

 ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download